Currently the NZPB is the only body appointed to accredit Psychologists - I don't have a problem with that as such. But, 1500 hrs (almost a year of full-time work) of supervised practice is a problem. There is an argument for quality over quantity regardless of how you define supervision.

Some time ago we figured out that one of the key “influencers” with respect to Tertiary enrolments were school careers advisors; and yes, they were steering students towards what they felt were courses with jobs. At first sweep this is a rational argument, if you accept that a degree is merely a device necessary to obtain first destination employment and that there is such a thing as a life-long career pathway. On further interrogating it becomes clear that neither of these things are true. Degree level studies rarely provide pure vocational training (for good reason) and modern workers pursue multiple careers. Worse, many careers advisors (and employers) had no clear grasp of what modern degree studies look like. This meant that institutions had to put more into to informing careers advisors and marketing directly to parents/students with limited benefits all round.

The situation is already quite bleak. The Education Ministry estimated that enrolments in HE could drop by as much as 7%. That was before the election. The bulk of new student enrolments will take place in January 2018. Were I parent or student, why wouldn’t I wait for proposed free fees legislation to kick in? I worry that many will wait until mid 2018 or Jan 2019 to enrol. Last year the whole sector under enrolled by an unexpectedly large amount which coincided with a dip in overseas enrolments. The more forward-looking institutions sought to cut costs last year and there isn’t a lot of meat left on the bone. The Student Achievement Component (SAC) hasn’t increased along with operating costs for several years now, a problem that was largely overcome by recruiting extra students, a solution which is no longer viable. If they do lay people off next year, they will do it in “unpopular” subjects, those people will not be re-employed if and when the tide comes in. For many Arts subjects this is a disaster, in turn New Zealand risks losing much of its world leading capital in terms of policy. A big boost to the existing SAC component is needed but I doubt it has been budgeted for in this round.

Like @TouchMyPoly I’m delighted at the prospect of three free years of Tertiary study. Anything that makes education more accessible is good with me. I look forward to having more peeps actually show up for class (yes I said that).

But we at Ivory Towers Inc. are still a little apprehensive.

Speaking selfishly, all the love has gone to teh studnets.

This should bother everyone:

“He said the tight budget could also force cuts in academic staff in fields where student numbers are declining, such as arts and education, although there could be staff increases in expanding courses such as engineering.”

Last year the “Market model” of HE bit hard. There is the possibility that while students wait for free fees it will bite harder. When permanent staff are made redundant, in important, but unpopular areas of study, NZ loses academic capital and capability. We lose the how, the experience and we are unable to bring in new ideas. I don’t work at the School of Ed. At AU but I sure as f**k would miss it if it wasn’t there.

In the long run this will affect us all. Broadly speaking, the chronic under funding of HE needs a fix that does not rely on student poverty, which is evidently unsustainable.

Consequently, I love the change in Govt. but am mindful of what I have wished for.

Especially when those in the most dire need of a skills upgrade are the ones least able to afford it, or otherwise aren't suited to traditional tertiary study.

I think it is worse than this. Many of those who would most benefit from higher education are unable to attend in full the courses that they are paying for. They are busy trying to work at the same time. It is very difficult to succeed let alone excel under these conditions.

But international education is a significant export earner for New Zealand. And if you're talking about high-value immigration, already-settled people with tertiary degrees would seem to fit that bill.

Mmmm yeah I'd like to see the real numbers on this, I suspect that a lot of the export earnings in this area come at diploma level, not degree.